How To Lead Clever People
business.in.com
business.in.com
Most of the do's and don't infographic were either false or obvious. Example, Do: 'Talk Straight'. Don't: 'Use bull or deceive'. Really? I'm pretty sure this advice applies to every management position in existence outside of politics.
I'd like to see an in-depth analysis of why the best engineers go to Google, but not AOL. I'd like to see more empirical based analysis on how to keep incredibly smart people to stay at your organization even though they're sharp enough and confident enough to go out on their own.
It seems he's pushing a book about 'Clever Management'. I haven't read the book but if this article is any indication it will be one of those 80% filler business books that you read and walk away feeling like you didn't really learn anything new or non-obvious.
"Clevers", on the other hand, will rebel when there's deception, but will dig into an honest challenge.
His list is actually quite good, even if some of the parts seem obvious. He seems to have gone for a more complete list, rather than try to only list things that don't seem obvious. Also, "clevers" are more sensitive to the 'do not' list than sheeple are. They are much more likely to rebel.
By rebel, I mean cause discord or quit.
Maybe I missed something in my 3 second skim, but this guy sounds like he just wants to ride some asinine gimmick like "Seven Habits.." or "The Southbeach Diet".
Here is my take on managing people, "clevers" and "non-clevers" (stupids? muggles? non-college?...) Remember that the people you hire are, in fact, people, rather than cranky forklifts. People need challenge, creativity, and growth to thrive, though they are often willing trade some time doing monotonous bullshit if there is a decent tradeoff; if you do have do monotonous bullshit, make sure they get to some cool stuff that follows from that. Figure out their "will-to-power" and how they view themselves, and align your goals with their own.
Remember that even though you went to an Ivy League school and they graduated from the local junior college, they need the same stuff as you.
"Clevers"?? really? he should be embarassed.
Some people just want to be with attractive people. Or rich people. Or funny people. Or people of high social standing.
It's whatever their definition of "good for something" is... and that definition isn't always "smart".
It is unfortunate that the article uses the term 'clever' to make a slightly unclear differentiation from 'knowledge worker.' Maybe if the term 'innovator' were selected then the article would be clearer. It would also help to explain why frequent feedback may be disadvantageous. Managing or harnessing innovative people is extremely difficult and it is an important subject to discuss and study.
I think what is true is that most people don't have the opportunity to be truly human at work (challenged, interested, etc) because the current system doesn't hire human beings, but just "function-fulfillers". Then we get disappointed when the human beings we hired don't act like simple robots... go figure ...
(I don't know how true to life the books are, but the Toyota Way series makes a big point about how important it is to allow -- demand, in fact -- people to grow and challenge themselves, from the engineers to the production workers. It is the US unions insistence on highly constrained work rules and job functions that made Deming hate them, rather than anything to do with wages.)
Also -- nobody wants to work with an arrogant asshole who "thinks they are a superstar", whether they are "a clever" or "a stupid". But it is only folks with low self esteem or power trips who willingly surround themselves with people of less talent themselves.
Knowledge worker? Innovator? -- that could be anyone, including a fry cook at McDonalds, if it was allowed to them. I have worked some shit, shit jobs, and I was always struck by how the spread in raw intelligence was about the same as in my elite private high school (now study skills and entitlement, however, is something the "non-clevers" just don't have at the moment, but that is a cultural thing that could be changed, if we cared.)
There are plenty of people, even knowledge workers, who are satisfied with a steady paycheck and a low level of workplace stimulation. Should one force them to improve? If you do, then they often move on (in my experience). That is why the distinction brought up between innovators and knowledge workers is important.
If you see your company as a machine in which you and a few select managers are the controllers, and everyone else is, somewhat literally, just a tool. This is the subconcious model that permeates our society, for better or for worse.
"There are plenty of people, even knowledge workers, who are satisfied with a steady paycheck and a low level of workplace stimulation."
Really? That sounds a lot like somebody in power justifying to themselves why the other people are not in power -- because they are "satisfied" with their lot. This is a very, very old trope, including the whole White Man's Burden thing, etc.
Not just that, Colleges are for learning and studying among bright people. From where does this idea that being from a Ivy league automatically makes you deserving of rewards irrespective of work come from? This sort of attitude comes because people generally go these colleges for brand-on-the-resume factor.
In the real world, getting stuff done is all that matters. Whether a guy from Ivy league does it or some one who has never attended any school. Rewards must be aligned with work and nothing else.
1. They are clever, remember that.
2. Remember 1. Stay out of their way, let them do what they are so good at doing.
3. Remember 1. Don't try to outsmart them at work. Unless it's not work related. Have fun there.
4. Remember 1. Do or help them do what they are not willing to do. Clear the trash, or hire someone to do it.
5. Remember 1. Help them do what they are good at. Give them resources. Remove blockers.
6. Remember 1. Give them challenges. Nothing bores clever people more than not feeling challenged by their work (read: their work do not include politics)
7. Protect them from politics. They might be good at shielding themselves, but that's not an effective use of their time. This includes you helping other teams that don't work with you. If every other team hates yours for performing and getting all the rewards, this might not make life good for you or your clever people.
8. Let them know what you have done for them. Don't brag, but this is a necessity for human relationships to work out, especially at work.
Edit: typo
4) To save a few $, they made EVERY employee do cleaning duties. Take out the trash, clean the fridge and microwave, etc. This caused no end of strife, and couldn't possibly have been worth the little money they saved.
7) Politics were awesome initially, but then the CEO's friend was promoted to being a manager. After a major screwup, the CEO moved the guilt from the manager to EVERYONE under him. For not going over his head when he was making a mistake. The politics were made obvious at that point.
8) I often did NOT know what the company was doing for me behind the scenes. I only saw the things they failed to do, and had little appreciation for the things they did. I'm sure they thought they were just keeping me from being bothered, but they really should have tooted their own horn a bit here.
In the end, these were factors in my leaving, but not the biggest one. Pay was the biggest. So I'll add to your list:
9. Pay them appropriately. If you don't, they're clever enough to find someone who will.
Really?
Perhaps they mean, give frequent feedback on what but not on how? I'm not sure where they were going with this.
Such people need to be mentored, and they need to feel favored (which is politically messy). If they feel like the people "in charge" are looking out for them and moving political obstacles out of their way, they'll be loyal. If they don't feel that way, they'll do what they think will teach them. Remember how they got smart: fighting the system, breaking rules. Getting an education by "stealing" it from a boss is natural to them.